Supreme Court Upholds Limited Application of Knowing Transfer of Communicable Disease Statute

State v. Rick, Minn.S.Ct., 8/21/2013.  This comes up from the court of appeals.  Read here.  The case is about the interpretation of Minnesota’s “knowing transfer of communicable disease” statute, Minn.Stat. 609.2241, subd. 2.  This statute defines two different acts that are criminal when committed by a person with a communicable disease.  Under subdivision 2(1) “sexual penetration” with another without first disclosing the presence of the disease is a crime.  Under subdivision 2(2) the “transfer of blood, sperm organs or tissue” is a crime. 

Mr. Rick engaged in consensual penetration with another person after disclosing that he had a communicable disease.  The state charged him with violating both subdivisions but the jury acquitted him of violating subdivision 2(1), sexual penetration.  The court of appeals reversed his conviction under subdivision 2(2), concluding that “transfer” in subdivision 2(2) applied only to medical procedures.  Chief Justice Gildea, writing for a five member court – Stras and Lillehaug not participating – upholds the opinion of the court of appeals.  The court concludes that subdivision 2(2) addresses transactions in which sperm is donated or sold for a medical reason, and does not include sexual penetration.